I was pleased to read Neil's response in TLE, and (not) shocked to
hear of Mr. Brown's dissembling as far as the Bill of Rights. He
shows repeatedly his colours as a true politician. That such a viper
in our midst can exist and be so successful is infuriating. I have
been for years an ardent speculative fiction reader, and have long
ceased apologizing for it. I can't believe that Mr. Brown actually
thought pointing out that Neil is a writer of Science Fiction (and a
goddamn good one) would shame him in some way. I really can't recall
any single work of literature that Harry (really) authored.

The ideas of SF have the unique ability of standing the tests of
time. Some ideas first found their way onto SF books before they
were possible technologically. Like the TV, space flight,
geosynchronous communication devices, L.A.S.E.R.s (influenced by SF,
I spoke with Gordon Gould about it), the Chunnel, black holes,
cellular telephones, and many others have their origins in
speculative fiction.

Concepts survive in SF, concepts that you can actually use in your
day-to-day taxpaying lives. Like the idea that freedom isn't just a
word in the dictionary comes to mind. These concepts that escape the
pages of Suzanne and Shelton are that we men and women are free to
chose the course of our lives. We can interact with our technology in
a positive way, and make indepedent lives. Without Big Brother
(another SF concept) up our butts with a microscope. Without being
beholden to a government doling out scraps to us to live on.

I resent the sarcastic intimation of another reader that suggested we
have to "hide in our homes", that we suffer under some great
delusion. It's not a dream, baby, it's real. One way or another the
right of self determination is being undermined, on many fronts.

Companies have sneakily decided that businesses (particularly retail)
are "Gun Free Zones", terminating employees if they dare to think
that they are Constitutionally protected. Clerks have been fired for
defending themselves against armed aggressors. One clerk in a 7-11 in
West Virginia was fired for attacking an armed robber, while he
himself was unarmed!

But we can't fight this most un-Constitutional concept without a
unified front. It's obvious that we need a strong leader that has
both a strong persuasive personality, and holds the Bill of Rights as
the law of the land. Neil is both a man of good character, and has a
realistic grasp of the World as it is now. I told Neil that if I
lived in Arizona, I'd vote for him, but I don't. So I can't. You
folks in Arizona can though, and in so doing make a statement about
the LP. Don't kid yourselves, cameradas , there's already a war on.
Pick the right side.

< Rather than, "Would local control of public education be
<preferable?" Ask, "Do you support separation of Child and State?"

Now this is some scary shit!

Not only do we have an incredible degree of indoctrination going on
now, but we have Gore not all that long ago calling for "universal
preschool", and today I heard some bit on talk radio about a similar
initiative to push the same agenda at the state level all over the
country.

These folks do NOT appear to be interested in giving up, or even in
slacking off their agenda, not one bit. "For the children", indeed!

I particularly like those last five words up there -- "Separation of
Child and State" -- sorta has a nice ring to it.

As is not uncommon among free souls, L. Neil Smith is much better at
composing fantasies than dealing with reality. He has manufactured
horrific monsters out of petty quibbles regarding organization and
style. His outrage is much more important to him than civil
communication or persuasion.

As the Republican Party continues adopting more and more libertarian
positions, those with "the truth" will likely focus all their wrath
on those with "lesser truths" who are enjoying some success. Changing
minds and the common political wisdom is an evolutionary process.
Some will find it more pleasing to curse the darkness.

Since tomorrow is October 23, I thought it might be worth noting in
tomorrow's TLE issue that October 23 is the anniversary of the
Hungarian Revolution of 1956. This is an anniversary that we who love
freedom should reflect upon.

On October 23, 1956, Hungarian students, workers and "just plain
folks" decided they had endured enough from their Soviet occupiers
and the Stalinist puppet government of Hungary. After a series of
peaceful demonstrations produced no change, they took up arms against
their oppressors.

The first fighting occurred between demonstrators and agents of the
AVO, the puppet government's secret police; but the revolution
quickly grew to battles between Hungarians armed mostly with Molotov
cocktails and the Soviet occupying forces' tank regiments. Amazingly,
in every case the Hungarians won. The Soviets, momentarily unsure how
to deal with effective resistance to their tyranny, withdrew their
occupying forces. For a few days it seemed as if Hungary had been
completely liberated from Communism; a free press and independent
political parties sprung up overnight.

Unfortunately, the story does not end happily. On November 4, the
Soviets invaded again, this time with overwhelming force. They shot
civilians indiscriminately, rounded up and executed several thousand
"counterrevolutionaries," and reimposed Communist rule in Hungary.
Hundreds of thousands of Hungarians fled to Western Europe.

(The above is the shortest condensation I can give. For a more
detailed account go to http://www.rev.hu)

The anniversary of this revolution is worth remembering in part for
the same reason that the Warsaw Ghetto revolt is worth remembering.
It is incredible that a small group of people, ill-armed and
ill-prepared, had the courage to rise against the enormous might of a
tyrannical power. It is even more incredible that they did so well.
Their bravery is worth honoring.

But, for those concerned about the growth of tyranny in our own place
and time, I think the Hungarian experience may hold an important, if
troubling, lesson. For the revolutionaries of Hungary, in one
important sense, did not die in vain. The events in Hungary displayed
to the Western world the true nature of Communism, and thereby
undermined the credibility of Western European Communist parties. For
many who had bought into the lies of the Soviet leaders, the
Hungarian revolution provided a final disillusionment. The Soviets
tried to spread more lies about "counterrevolutionaries fighting to
reverse the progress of the Hungarian people," but nobody believed
them.

The question now confronting us is: what events will be required to
make plain to the general population the true nature of the modern
American federal government? Evidently, the slaughter of eighty
innocents at Waco wasn't sufficient; most people seem to have bought
the Feds' lies on that one. The various atrocities against
individuals, so well documented by TLE's writers, can all be swept
under the rug or explained away. What will it take to convince people
that the Feds are a real threat to their liberties? How much damage
must they do before they are exposed and stopped?

I don't know whether to be more worried that I don't know the answer
-- or worried that, sometime soon, I will know.